Gonsalves: Swinging the sword of Damocles

Just about every year since 1984, state Rep Byron Rushing, D-Boston, files legislation that, if it ever passed, would form a special commission to review the state's official seal and motto.

Comment

By Sean Gonsalves

capecodtimes.com

By Sean Gonsalves

Posted Feb. 27, 2014 at 2:00 AM

By Sean Gonsalves

Posted Feb. 27, 2014 at 2:00 AM

» Social News

Just about every year since 1984, state Rep. Byron Rushing, D-Boston, files legislation that, if it ever passed, would form a special commission to review the state's official seal and motto.

According to the most recent iteration of the bill (H.2873) — a hearing for which was slated for Wednesday — the special commission would examine our official emblem to determine if it accurately reflects "the historic and contemporary commitments of the commonwealth to peace, justice, liberty and equality."

The special commission would also be charged with making recommendations for a revised or new design — "if deemed appropriate."

Of course, to have an inkling of whether the current seal is "appropriate," you'd have to know a little something about its history. Yes, I know we live in a state that supposedly takes history very seriously. But, honestly — even though we've all seen it thousands of times on state flags, stationary, vehicles and buildings — would you be able to describe the seal in any detail without a visual aid?

Even with a visual aid, I'd wager only a tiny percentage of Bay State residents could recite what the Latin phrase that rings the seal says in English. (I admit to having Googled it myself).

Though first conceived in 1629 when King Charles I granted a charter to the Massachusetts Bay Colony, the seal and motto has been revised several times. It began with a nearly nude Native American sporting a leaf Speedo under the inscription "come over and help us" — because, as any history buff knows, the real reason the Pilgrims came is because the Wampanoags of yesteryear were sending smoke signals across the pond, pleading with the enlightened Christians of Europe to come and lead them out of savagery.

It wasn't until 1885 that the state seal took on its present form — a slightly more attired Native American holding a bow and arrow, which some claim pays homage to the state's aboriginal people, even if the Indian depicted is dressed in the regalia of a Montana tribe and doesn't represent what descendents of the Algonquin nation actually looked like at the time.

But hey, these are the same seal-loving PC-haters who loved watching Italians play Indians on TV and in the movies — not exactly a bunch who cares much about historical accuracy — unless, of course, their own non-Indian ethnic group is at issue.

For years now, activists have said they have no problem with the state seal depicting a Native American, even if the details are off. The problem is that sabre-swinging disembodied arm hanging over the dude's head like the sword of Damocles.

"Color-blind" patriots who swear they believe in the sovereignty of the individual will twist themselves into linguistic knots to explain how only an over-sensitive PC liberal commie could possibly see a sword hanging over the symbolic head of a people systematically slaughtered and dispossessed to be anything other than an "honor."

It's kind of like a modern German politician defending a swastika over the likeness of a symbolic Jew as really being about the ancient history of a peace symbol.

Even if you're willing to ignore the genocide of native peoples at the hands of those who came up with the state seal in the first place, the motto itself is absurd. Only a worshipper of the god of Mars could proclaim (with a straight-face): "By the sword we seek peace, but peace only under liberty."

As Mashpee Wampanoag and executive director of the state's Commission on Indian Affairs Jim Peters told me, what that really means is: "We are going to liberate you from your land and possessions and you need to like it."

Interestingly, Peters seemed almost resigned to the present reality. And who can blame him? I couldn't get Rushing or the Joint Committee on State Administration and Regulatory Oversight to even return my calls.

"It's an every year thing," Peters said. "It's unfortunate we don't take the time to look at it and consider the thought process that actually came up with seal and how they felt about Native Americans."

Though Peters and the Indian Affairs commission have in years past pushed for Rushing's bill to move forward, Peters told me before Wednesday's hearing, "it may as well stay as an ongoing reminder of the mentality against native people then and today."

Silly me. I thought "peace" would be symbolized by an olive branch, or dove or peace pipe, especially in a state as supposedly "liberal" as ours. But the clear moral of this story is: if you live by the sword and win, you not only get to write the history, you can mock the dignity of others by labeling their concerns as mere "PC nonsense," implying that might-makes-right.

Funny how in America only people of color are told to "get over it," while there never seems to be an expiration date on the relevance of official historical grievances, whether that's tea taxes, Pearl Harbor or 9/11.

Reminds me of the opening scene in "The Avengers" movie when the villain Loki says, "I come with glad tidings, of a world made free ... You will know peace." And then Samuel Jackson's character Nick Fury says: "Yeah, you say 'peace,' But I kind of think you mean the other thing."

Sean Gonsalves can be reached at sgonsalves@capecodonline.com. Follow Sean Gonsalves on Twitter @SeanGonCCT.